Global Witness and the journalism exemption: ICO to have the first go? – Panopticon

Posted May 2nd, 2014 in data protection, news, rectification, stay of proceedings by tracey

‘Panopticon has previously reported on the novel and important data protection case Steinmetz and Others v Global Witness [2014] EWHC 1186 (Ch). The High Court (Henderson J) has now given a judgment on a procedural point which will set the shape for this litigation.’

Full story

Panopticon, 30th April 2014


Operation Cotton – what next? – Halsbury’s Law Exchange

‘When does the same Government that decides to prosecute someone have an obligation to ensure that that individual has representation? That was the question that HHJ Leonard had to answer at Southwark Crown Court on 1 May 2014. The case is called “Operation Cotton” and, as the argument proceeded, featured five legally aided defendants. The argument got more media attention this week than it perhaps otherwise would because the legally aided defendants were represented by Alexander Cameron QC, who happens to be the brother of the Prime Minister (Cameron QC was acting for free, which his brother would surely applaud as an example of the “Big Society” in action).’

Full story

Halsbury’s Law Exchange, 1st May 2014


Weber v Weber – WLR Daily

Posted April 15th, 2014 in conflict of laws, EC law, jurisdiction, law reports, stay of proceedings by tracey

Weber v Weber: (Case C-438/12);   [2014] WLR (D)  165

‘There fell within the category of proceedings which had as their object “rights in rem in immovable property”, within the meaning of article 22(1) of Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001, an action brought before the courts of another member state, seeking a declaration of invalidity of the exercise of a right of pre-emption attaching to that property and which produced effects with respect to all the parties. Before staying its proceedings in accordance with article 27(1) of Regulation No 44/2001, the court second seised was required to examine whether, by reason of a failure to take into consideration the exclusive jurisdiction laid down in article 22(1) thereof, the decision of the court first seised would be recognised in the other member states in accordance with article 35(1) of that Regulation.’

WLR Daily, 3rd April 2014


Second bites at the cherry, defective witness statements and sanction: a practical view from the Bar – Littleton Chambers

‘In his monthly column, James Bickford Smith discusses the Court of Appeal’s recent guidance on communications with judges after draft judgments are circulated, some interesting judicial
observations on defective witness statements, and the Commercial Court’s important relief from
sanctions decision in Re C (A Child) [2014] EWCA Civ 70.’

Full story

Littleton Chambers, 7th March 2014


Summit Navigation Ltd and another v Generali Romania Asigurare Reasigurare SA and another – WLR Daily

Summit Navigation Ltd and another v Generali Romania Asigurare Reasigurare SA and another [2014] EWHC 398 (Comm); [2014] WLR (D) 104

‘All sanctions were not equal nor were they to be treated as equivalent to one another for the purposes of an application for relief from sanctions under CPR r 3.9.’

WLR Daily, 21st February 2014


High Court sends out strong warning against ‘tactical’ use of Mitchell – Litigation Futures

‘The Mitchell ruling is not to be used as a tactical weapon, the High Court has warned litigators in a case where its opprobrium was reserved for the conduct of the party on the other side of the default.’

Full story

Litigation Futures, 21st February 2014


Judge orders UK ban of one HTC device but stays decision on ban of another –

Posted December 5th, 2013 in intellectual property, news, patents, stay of proceedings, telecommunications by sally

‘An HTC mobile device will be banned from sale in the UK after Friday afternoon unless the company wins the right to appeal against the imposition of that ban on that timescale.’

Full story, 5th December 2013


IPCom GmbH & Co KG v HTC Europe Co Ltd and others – WLR Daily

Posted November 28th, 2013 in appeals, law reports, patents, stay of proceedings by tracey

IPCom GmbH & Co KG v HTC Europe Co Ltd and others: [2013] EWCA Civ ;   [2013] WLR (D)  456

‘The Court of Appeal gave guidance concerning the circumstances in which an English court should grant a stay of patent proceedings pending the outcome of parallel proceedings in the European Patent Office.’

WLR Daily, 21st November 2013


Court of Appeal backs parallel UK and EPO patent proceedings but alters guidelines for future cases –

‘A dispute over the alleged infringement of a standard-essential mobile technology European patent will be ruled on by the High Court despite there being ongoing proceedings before the European Patent Office (EPO) about whether the patent is valid.’

Full story, 21st November 2013


Sex in the IPT – Panopticon

Posted November 12th, 2013 in appeals, investigatory powers, news, police, stay of proceedings, tribunals by tracey

“As with all the best headlines, this one is slightly misleading. Readers can scarcely fail to have noticed the coverage surrounding the major ongoing case regarding a former undercover (under-the-covers?) police officer, Mark Kennedy, who (together with others) infiltrated political and environmental activists over a period of years. Claims were commenced in the High Court, with part of the conduct complained of involving ensuing sexual relations between activists/their partners and undercover officers.”

Full story

Panopticon, 8th November 2013


Finance and Divorce November 2013 Update – Family Law Week

Posted November 8th, 2013 in civil partnerships, divorce, financial provision, news, stay of proceedings by tracey

“Jessica Craigs, senior solicitor and David Salter, Joint Head of Family Law at Mills & Reeve LLP analyse the financial remedies and divorce news and cases published in October.”

Full story

Family Law Week, 7th November 2013


Sexual liaisons by undercover police officers could be authorised by RIPA – UK Human Rights Blog

Posted November 7th, 2013 in appeals, investigatory powers, news, police, stay of proceedings by tracey

“AJA and others v Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis [2013] EWCA Civ 1342. The words ‘personal or other relationship’ in the section 26(8)(a) Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 included intimate sexual relationships so that the Investigatory Powers Tribunal had jurisdiction to hear the appellants’ claims that their human rights had been violated by undercover police officers who had allegedly had sexual relationships with them.”

Full story

UK Human Rights Blog, 6th November 2013


Mittal v Mittal – WLR Daily

Mittal v Mittal: [2013] EWCA Civ ;   [2013] WLR (D)  391

“Paragraph 9 of Schedule 1 to the Domicile and Matrimonial Proceedings Act 1973 gave the courts of England and Wales jurisdiction to stay matrimonial proceedings in favour of competing prior proceedings in a non-member state.”

WLR Daily, 18th October 2013


Mittal v. Mittal: English Family Courts Still Open for Business in the Wider World – Family Law Week

“Tim Amos QC and Duncan Brooks of Queen Elizabeth Building, counsel for the respondent, consider the issues and implications of the Court of Appeal’s important judgment in Mittal v Mittal.”

Full story

Family Law Week, 20th October 2013


High Court refuses to delay high street court battle with MasterCard – The Lawyer

“An attempt by MasterCard to avoid a multi-billion damages claim from a dozen retailers because the monthly due diligence costs charged by its lawyers at Jones Day could be as much as £700,000 has been rejected by the High Court.”

Full story

The Lawyer, 16th October 2013


Fortress Value Recovery Fund I LLC and others v Blue Skye Special Opportunities Fund LP and others – WLR Daily

Fortress Value Recovery Fund I LLC and others v Blue Skye Special Opportunities Fund LP and others [2013] EWCA Civ 367; [2013] WLR (D) 154

“Section 8(1) of the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 allowed for a promisor to give a third party an enforceable substantive right subject to a procedural condition on which the promisor might but need not insist. Section 8(2) of the Act allowed for a promisor to give a third party an enforceable procedural right which the third party might but need not exercise, since the right was unilateral.”

WLR Daily, 17th April 2013


Secretary of State for the Home Department v CC and another – WLR Daily

Secretary of State for the Home Department v CC and another [2012] EWHC 2837 (Admin); [2012] WLR (D) 283

“Where it was alleged that illegal actions of state agents constituted an abuse of the process of the court, it was not necessary to prove actual knowledge of that illegality for abuse of process to be established. There might be situations where mere recklessness or even negligent conduct could justify a stay on grounds of abuse of process.”

WLR Daily, 19th October 2012


Regina (SG ( Iraq)) v Secretary of State for the Home Department: Regina (OR ( Iraq)) Same – WLR Daily

Posted July 18th, 2012 in appeals, asylum, Iraq, judicial review, law reports, stay of proceedings by tracey

Regina (SG ( Iraq)) v Secretary of State for the Home Department: Regina (OR ( Iraq)) Same: [2012] EWCA Civ 940;  [2012] WLR (D)  207

“A claimant affected by, but not party to, a country guidance determination which was under appeal to the Court of Appeal was not entitled to an automatic stay of removal pending the outcome of the appeal. It was in the court’s discretion to grant a stay, but the court should not stay removal pending the decision of the Court of Appeal unless the claimant had adduced a clear and coherent body of evidence that the findings of the tribunal were in error.”

WLR Daily, 13th July 2012


Samsung Electronics (UK) Ltd v Apple Inc – WLR Daily

Posted June 6th, 2012 in EC law, law reports, stay of proceedings, trade marks by tracey

Samsung Electronics (UK) Ltd v Apple Inc: [2012] EWCA Civ 729;   [2012] WLR (D)  166

“Where the proprietor of a registered Community design, the validity of which was already in issue in proceedings before the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) or another Community design court, brought a counterclaim alleging infringement of the design against a claimant who had issued a claim in a Community design court seeking a declaration of non-infringement, the stay of proceedings required by article 91(1) of the Community Design Regulation was a stay of the counterclaim, not the claim.”

WLR Daily, 30th May 2012


Secretary of State for the Home Department v CB and another – WLR Daily

Secretary of State for the Home Department v CB and another [2012] EWCA Civ 418; [2012] WLR (D) 112

“Where a court made a non-derogating control order in proceedings against a person under the Prevention of Terrorism Act 2005, it had no jurisdiction to order a permanent stay of such proceedings under the Act nor under its case management powers in the Civil Procedure Rules, unless the controlled person requested such a course of action.”

WLR Daily, 3rd April 2012